Revolutionary Days

The First Steps

Thefire was sparked off by a quite ordinary clash between labour and
capital—a strike at a factory. It is interesting to note, however, that
this strike of twelve thousand Putilov workers, which broke out on Monday,
January 3, was before everything a strike in the name of proletarian
solidarity. It was caused by the dismissal of four workers. “When the
demand for their reinstatement was turned down,” writes a comrade from
St. Petersburg on January 7, “the factory struck work immediately to a
man. The strike is fully disciplined. The workers put several men to protect
the machines and other property against possible damage by the less
class-conscious workers. They then sent a delegation to other factories to
communicate to them their demands and to ask them to join the strike.” Many
thousands of workers began to join the movement. The legal Zubatov workers’
society, sponsored by the government in order to demoralise the proletariat by
systematic monarchist propaganda, rendered no little service in organising the
movement in its early stages and in extending it. What happened was something
that the Social-Democrats had long pointed out to the Zubatovists, namely, that
the revolutionary instinct of the working class and the spirit of solidarity
would prevail over all petty police ruses. The most backward workers would be
drawn into the movement by the Zubatovists, and then the tsarist government
would itself take care to drive the workers farther; capitalist exploitation
itself would turn them away from the peaceable and out-and-out hypocritical
Zubatov fold towards revolutionary Social-Democracy. The practice of
proletarian life and proletarian struggle would prove superiorto all the “theories” and all the vain efforts of the Zubatov

			       gentry.[1]

Andthat is what has happened. One comrade, a worker and member of the
St. Petersburg Committee of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, gives
his impressions as follows in a letter addressed to us under date of January 5.

“Iam writing under the fresh impression of a meeting of workers of the
Semyannikov Shipyard just held at the Nevskaya Zastava. But first, a word about
the feeling among the St. Petersburg workers. As you know,’Zubatov’
organisations have lately begun to crop up here, or rather are being revived
under the leadership of the priest Gapon. These organisations have grown
considerably in number and strength in a very short time. There are now 11
branches of the so-called Russian Factory Workers’ Assembly. As was to be
expected, the results of these meetings were inevitably the same as in the
South.

“Wecan now say with certainty that a sweeping strike movement is
starting in St. Petersburg. Almost every day you hear of a new strike at one or
another factory. The Putilov Works has been on strike now for two days.About a fortnight ago the Schau Cotton Mills in the Vyborg Quarter went on
strike. The strike lasted about four days. The workers lost
it. The strike may break out anew any day. A fighting spirit prevails
everywhere, but it could hardly be said to be in favour of the Social-Democratic
line. Most of the workers stand for a purely economic struggle and against a
political one. However, we may expect and hope that this feeling will change and
the workers will realise that with out a political struggle they can achieve no
economic improvements. Today the Nevsky Shipyard (Semyannikov’s) went on
strike. The local branch of the Russian Factory Workers’ Assembly is trying to
lead the strike, but it will not succeed, of course. The Social-Democrats will
be the leaders, notwithstanding the fact that they are woefully weak here.

“Leafletshave been issued by the St. Petersburg

Commit tee:two addressed
to the Schau Cotton Mills and one tothe Putilov workers. A meeting of the Nevsky Shipyard workers was held today. It
      drew about 500 workers. Members of the local branch of the Assembly spoke
      for the first time. They avoided political demands and put forward chiefly
      economic demands. Shouts of disapproval were heard in the crowd. At this
      point Stroyev, ofRusskaya Gazeta, who is greatly respected
    among the St. Petersburg workers, came forward and proposed a resolution,
    which, he said, had been drafted by him and representatives of
    Social-Democracy. The resolution, though emphasising the antagonism of class
    interests between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, did this
    inadequately. Social-Democratic workers spoke after Stroyev and supported
    the resolution in principle, although stressing its limited character and
    its inadequacy. This started a commotion; some of those present did not like
    the speeches of the Social-Democrats and tried to obstruct the meeting. The
    majority voted against the chairman, who was among the obstructionists, and
    elected a new chairman, a socialist. The members of the (Zubatov) ’society’,
    however, refused to keep silent and continued to make disturbances. Al
    though the overwhelming majority of the meeting (90 per cent) sided with the
    socialists, the meeting in the long run broke up without achieving anything
    and postponed its decision until the next day. One thing can be said at any
    rate—the Social-Democrats succeeded in turning the mood of the workers
    in their favour. Tomorrow there is to be a big meeting. There may be two or
    three thousand people there. An imposing demonstration is to be expected one
    of these days, something like the July demonstration in the South in
    1903. The Franco-Russian Society Works is on strike—about four to five
    thousand people. They say a strike has started at the Stieglitz Cotton
    Mills—about five thousand. A strike is expected at the Obukhov
    Works— five or six thousand.”

Comparingthis information of a Social-Democrat, a local committee-man (who
could only know, of course, what was happening in a small area in
St. Petersburg), with the foreign press reports, especially the English, we are
led to the conclusion that the latter are distinguished by a high degree of
accuracy.

Thestrike spread from day to day with amazing speed. The workers held numerous
meetings and drew up a “charter” of their own—their economic
and political demands. Both these demands, despite the Zubatovist leadership,
coincided on the whole with the demands of the Social-Democratic Party
programme, including the slogan for the convocation of a Constituent Assembly on
the basis of universal, direct, and equal suffrage by secret ballot. The
spontaneous growth of this strike, unexampled in point of magnitude, was far,
far in advance of the planned participation in the movement on the part of the
organised Social-Democrats. But let them speak for

them selves.

[1]Cf. Lenin,What Is To Be Done?, pp. 86-88. (See present
edition Vol. 5, pp. 454-56.—Ed.)—Lenin